NewEnergyNews

Gleanings from the web and the world, condensed for convenience, illustrated for enlightenment, arranged for impact...

While the OFFICE of President remains in highest regard at NewEnergyNews, this administration's position on climate change makes it impossible to regard THIS president with respect. Below is the NewEnergyNews theme song until 2020.

Thursday, May 31, 2007

Solar, wind and wave/tide/current energies are like national forests and public parks: They require and deserve incentives, for the common good. Nuclear energy is like a ski resort, popular as long as the attendant risk, liability and environmental harm are paid for by the public, but should the public pay those expenses? Oil & gas are like amusement parks, popular, costly and, up until recently, affordable. But upkeep is beginning to make tickets too expensive and there is less need for them when the public derives more value from national forests and public parks. Let those who want amusement parks pay the price.

WHOBusinesses and governments.opportunity everywhere (click to enlarge)WHATThe article raises the question of whether the incentives, mandates and subsidies driving investment in alternative energies amount to sound policy or bad economics.

WHENThe incentives, mandates and subsidies have been, are being and will be used to encourage development of alternative energies. Examples: NYC will convert its city taxis to hybrids by 2012; President Bush called for the US to replace 20% of gasoline with ethanol by 2017.

WHEREFederal government subsidies from Washington, D.C., renewable portfolio standards (RPS) for 20 states and city-sponsored incentives across the country reflect actions in the EU, Asia and around the world.

WHY- The private sector, seeing the incentives, mandates and subsidies, is ramping up activity to get at the financial opportunities. But is this a market distortion, the economic basis of a bubble like the internet enthusiasms of the 1990s? Or the incentivizing of a new revolution (like the telegraph, the railroads, the Internet)? (Example: 85 ethanol projects will double capacity by 2008.)- It may be a distortion NOT to incentivize renewable energies because they negate the social costs of carbon dioxide generating energy like coal and imported energy like oil & gas. Nevertheless, the incentives have the unintended consequence of driving prices up on other energies.States where Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) create an incentive to invest. (click to enlarge)QUOTES- Daniel Yergin, chairman, Cambridge Energy Research Associates: "There's a huge boom going on in alternative, renewable and new technologies, and it wouldn't be happening without the bouillabaisse of incentives, mandates, subsidies and the related group of ingredients…"- Rayola Dougher, senior economic analyst, American Petroleum Institute: "We think a reliance on market forces is the best way to satisfy any growing fuel requirements, and that any policies should provide a level playing field for all options…We just don't think at this point that the government should pick winners and losers."- Matt Hartwig, communications director, Renewable Fuels Association: “I equate the government support of ethanol to the government electrifying rural America or helping build the transcontinental railroads…The government helped set it up, and once it was there, the private sector took it over."- John Urbanchuk, director, LECG: "The whole alternative energy sector is still an infant industry and competing against a well-established, well-capitalized petroleum industry…"

The Blair legacy must include his courageous, aggressive leadership in preparing Britain to deal with climate change, even in facing controversial questions like offshore wind and nuclear energy development.

WHOBritish government’s Department of Trade and Industry's Low Carbon Buildings Program (LCBP)solar panels in the UKWHATHold removed, grants will be made available for homeowners’ micro-wind turbine and solar panel installations. New provisions: No monthly caps, planning permission required with application.

WHATNegotiations over the laws governing Iraqi oil & gas resource and revenue sharing between interested factions has reached no conclusions. One insider says legislation is two months away.

WHEN- This report made May 25; negotiations ongoing. There is an “end of May” deadline that is unlikely to be met. - Bahr al-Ulum’s statement was May 30.

WHERENegotiations ongoing in Baghdad.

WHY- The main contentions:1. The KRG wants distributed resources, giving them control over the northern oil regions, and distributed revenues paid directly to them2. Sunni and Shia groups favor more centralization through the Iraq National Oil Company (INOC)3. Unions threated a strike if multinational oil companies have access/ownership but investment from the multinationals may be necessary to revive the industry.- Production remains at 2 million barrels/day, despite 115 billion barrel reserves and capacity of 6 million barrels/day. Iraq’s 1.6 million barrel/day exports = 93% of Iraqi budget.- US leaders are pressuring the negotiators to make a law; many contend the pressure is toward including the multinationals in the deal. The negotiators expert in oil law want to resist the pressure.- A previously scheduled summit between negotiators and investors in Dubai was cancelled.- Bahr al-Ulum, oil minister September 2003 to June 2004 and May to December 2005, foresees grounds for compromise and resolution. Bahr al-Ulum is affiliated with the Fadhila Party, which is opposed to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's government. He would replace current oil minister Hussein al-Shahristani.She is losing.QUOTES- Hawrami: "Nothing to report yet, no progress, we are still in Baghdad…and have lined up more meetings to see if the remaining issue can be resolved."- Bahr al-Ulum: “[The new legislation will reconstitute the Iraq National Oil Company] which can regulate the oil and gas sectors which suffer from lack of coordination between several decision maker and administrative units."

WHENRahall’s act introduced May 23. The bill is under review. Mark up will begin after Memorial Day.

WHERERahall’s act introduced to House Committee on Natural Resources.

WHY- Rahall introduced the Energy Policy Reform and Revitalization Act: Enforced by the Departments of Interior and Energy, strict regulations with fines/jail time for new and existing non-compliant turbine owners. Rahall’s act has met serious opposition from wind energy experts and advocates. Many believe it is an example of legislation written without an understanding of wind energy technology.- Rahall seeks to protect federal land use but committee members seek to do so without impeding energy development. Witnesses told the committee the bill has redundant language and changes programs under way. Biofuel, hydro and wind may all be slowed.QUOTES- Wetstone: "Wind power is an essential element of the climate change solution…Further increasing the percentage of electricity wind produces in America will provide much-needed price stability, generate tens of millions of dollars in revenue for farmers and rural communities, and create tens of thousands of jobs…We should be looking for ways to accelerate wind energy's growth rather than putting roadblocks in its path."- Rahall: "I'm not against wind energy…But as it grows, and there's no denying that it is growing, there's increasing resistance due to lack of regulations and the adverse effect on wildlife, reported by the Government Accountability Office and the National Research Council…The Endangered Species Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act are not being fully complied with and the legislation seeks to enable the wind energy industry to grow in a way that's compatible with those federal laws." - Wetstone: "Wind energy requires no mining or drilling for fuel, no fuel transportation, no hazardous waste disposal, and no water use; and wind energy generates electricity without toxic pollutants like mercury, without greenhouse pollution, and of course without the conventional pollutants that cause smog and acid rain…Is this really an energy sector Congress should close down, for environmental reasons?" - Miller: "We have a lot of input but what we really want is a good fuel that makes economical and environmental sense and we ought to let people go to work and figure out how to come up with that product…" - Bissan: "I don't see why the process, which is working, should be changed…"

WHATBrooks wrote an op-ed piece which author Barber claims is a model for how Republicans will attack Gore if he runs for and wins the Democratic nomination for President.

WHENThe Brooks piece appeared May 22. It was about Gore’s theoretical 2008 presidential candidacy.

WHEREThe Brooks piece was in the NY Times.

WHY- Gore’s Oscar-winning film about climate change, “An Inconvenient Truth,” and his passionate environmental advocacy has engenedered new popularity.- Brooks calls Gore a "Vulcan Utopian" and an unemotional "Mr. Spock" in contrast to President Bush’s Captain Kirk.

QUOTES- Barber: “…the real problem is Gore has this "bizarre" rationalist view of human nature that makes a distinction between lower and higher parts of our brains even though "the reality is that there is no such neat distinction." Actually, David, it was folks like Christ and then Sigmund Freud who preferred this view about higher and lower parts of human nature, and I don't think either was exactly an Enlightenment rationalist…”- Barber: “…Well, David…We've spent six years witnessing the "dark thickets of human nature" in action in an administration that has made a fetish of ignoring reason, science and the Enlightenment. So if you want to make the '08 race a choice between reason and stupidity, between science and superstition and between Enlightenment and the "dark thickets of human nature," let's do it…”- Barber: “…I will be happy to have the "Vulcan Utopian" in my corner -- though I agree with you Gore is partial to dispassionately "exchanging facts" in order to "arrive at logical conclusions." Something you apparently disparage. And something for which President Bush and those Republicans who still admire him have shown little interest and still less talent…I'll bet my bottom dollar on Mr. Spock…most Americans are ready for policies rooted in fact rather than fiction, and will welcome a President capable of reaching "logical conclusions" and thus be thrilled to elect Al Gore as President…”

WHOThe Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium (MGSC), the Department of Energy (DOE)varieties of CCS (click to enlarge)WHATMGSC will conduct a “huff-and-puff” field test of Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) and geologic carbon dioxide sequestration by injecting CO2 into a producing oil well, letting it sit for 3-5 days, restarting well production and measuring changes in flow.

WHEN- MGSC is one of 7 regional partnerships created by DOE in 2002- The rural, flat agricultural site, an existing oil field for over 65 years, was chosen from 38 sites in June 2005.

WHERELoudon Field, Fayette County, Ill.

WHY- Geologic sequestration of CO2 is one of the most promising ideas to curtail greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Deep underground porous rock capped by impermeable rock can trap the GHGs.- EOR can also boost oil production if injection increases well pressure or reduces oil viscosity and increases flow.- A previous 45 ton CO2 injection increased production fourfold but petered out. This test will also measure the geologic sequestration retention.QUOTESWikipedia: “CCS applied to a modern conventional power plant could reduce CO2 emissions to the atmosphere by approximately 80-90% compared to a plant without CCS. Capturing and compressing CO2 requires much energy and would increase the fuel needs of a plant with CCS by about 10-40%. These and other system costs are estimated to increase the cost of energy from a power plant with CCS by 30-60% depending on the specific circumstances.”Wikipedia: “A major concern with CCS is whether leakage of stored CO2 will compromise CCS as a climate change mitigation option. For well-selected, designed and managed geological storage sites, IPCC estimates that CO2 could be trapped for millions of years, and are likely to retain over 99% of the injected CO2 over 1000 years.”

WHENThe IRS ruling is based on a provision of the Energy Policy Act of 2005.

WHEREThe tax break is federal. The fight is in Washington, D.C.

WHY- The provision was intended to support a process turning turkey offal into biofuel. A broader interpretation is being used for animal fat additives to petroleum. This could cost hundreds of millions in revenues as well as suppress small biodiesel producers.- Tyson Foods supplies animal fats to Conoco for 175 million gallons of renewable diesel, therefore is eligible for the tax break.- The tax break has inadvertently driven up the cost of animal fat, as oil companies seek it out as an additive to claim the incentive. This has driven up the cost of soap.click to enlargeQUOTES- Graham: “…[If Congress’s intent was to] foster renewable technology innovation and commercialization, then there must be parity among the technologies and feedstocks that are going to be utilized…”- Doggett: “…green-energy initiatives [become a] public boondoggle…”

WHENCitigroup’s commitment was made in May. B of A’s was in March. Both were 10-yeasr commitments.

WHERE

WHYCitigroup: $50 billion; Bank of America: $20 billion; Training will be necessary, experts agree. An example is jobs in wind: wind turbine and tower manufacturers, wind farm maintenance workers.The Apollo Alliance (a non-profit advocate for clean-energy job training) proposes $300 billion in federal funds to cities, over 10 years, to create 3 million jobs in building efficiency, renewable energy, investments, biofuels, etc., for low-income workers who have been hit disproportionately hard by global warming (example: Hurricane Katrina) and are likely to continue to be. SCOPE proposes $100 million in LA for 2000 jobs energy-retrofitting (upgrading/replacing insulation, lights, heating and cooling systems, windows, etc. )100 city buildings.click to enlargeQUOTESDan Esty, co-author, "Green to Gold…” & director, Yales’ Center for Business and Environment: "There's a huge demand for people trained for environmental skills…We had a record number of applicants to our program (this year) and our graduates have many more job opportunities…"Jones: "We believe the green, clean-energy economy can do more than create business opportunities for the rich…We also believe that the green economy can create job opportunities for the poor…The most important thing that the federal government can do right now on the job side is to make money available to cities to figure out their own strategies…" Barboza: "Greening existing infrastructure such as buildings is a great way to preserve and make more sustainable older urban communities that have been neglected…Projects that pay a fair wage can also benefit the local community, particularly low-income urban workers." Edmonds: “(Energy) technologies grow and are deployed in the context of an economy…Jobs are part of the production processes and therefore part of the deployment of those technologies." Solis: “[Funding training will] create pathways out of poverty…Businesses are already doing this and the biggest complaint is that there isn't a trained workforce…That's what our job should be -- to boost that."Sensenbrenner: "I believe the free market forces of the private sector offer the best road to job creation…I think relying on the government to create jobs is a dead end…Is installing a solar panel fundamentally different than installing a satellite dish? I have serious questions about what type of training will really be needed for so-called 'green collar' jobs."

WHOThe California Public Utilities Commission (PUC), President Michael Peevey; Timothy Simon, PUC commissioner; consumer advocate group The Utility Reform Network; top Democratic lawmakers Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, D-Los Angeles, Sen. Christine Kehoe, D-San Diego, and Assemblyman Lloyd Levine, D-Sherman Oaks.The earlier problems weren't exactly part of a trend (click to enlarge)WHATThe PUC moved to explore the possibility of re-instituting “direct access,” a program allowing large commercial power buyers (hospitals, universities, businesses) to purchase electricity from alternate providers. This is considered a step toward deregulation of energy and a possible vulnerability to crisis like the 200/2001 shortages and price spikes.

WHEN- Vote to consider “direct access” was May 24. - Consideration will last a minimum of 18 months.

WHEREState of California

WHY- Pro: California State University, Wal-Mart Stores Inc. & the Alliance for Retail Energy Markets. Argument: Retail energy competition allows shopping for lower rates, prices have stabilized.- Anti: The Utility Reform Network, Democratic legislators. Argument: Deregulation makes possible market manipulation, soaring utility prices and rolling blackouts as occurred in 2000/2001 and the legislative response to that crisis precludes deregulation until 2017.- The PUC’s action has 3 phases. 1. determine legal authority. 2. decide if it should. 3. when to roll it out.Which way?QUOTES- Peevey: "Consumers have choices for most of the purchases they make, and we will evaluate whether and how that may include electricity…Retail competition may exert further downward pressure on rates." - Simon: "Introducing competition has not always brought about lower rates for customers…"- Perata, Nunez, Kehoe, Levine: "The prohibitions enacted are not ambiguous.."

WHOFrank G. Zarb was US “energy czar,” served in the Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush, and Clinton administrations and headed the Nasdaq, among many other distinguished positions. Aside from not being able to hold a job for very long, he seems more than qualified to express an opinion.click to enlargeWHATThe U.S. failure to accommodate reality by its ongoing dependence on foreign oil and how that can be addressed.

WHENIn this op-ed piece, Mr. Zarb contends the U.S. has failed to move away from dependence on foreign oil for 30 years despite its ability to eliminate this vulnerability, an historical anomaly as well as a political mistake.

WHEREMr. Zarb lays the failure to make this change at the feet of U.S. political leadership.

WHY- Four “facts”: No. 1: US vulnerability to interrupted oil supply; No. 2: Foreign, military and economic policy dependence on oil; No. 3: Failure to act after the 1973 Arab oil embargo, when imports were 35% of consumption; No. 4: Lack of response is a lack of political will.- Presidents Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton and Bush may all be implicated.- Zarb’s energy plan ground rules to reduce oil consumption & increase other energy supplies over a 10 to 12 year period: 1. gas prices must signal a change in driving and car-buying: a 50 cent/gallon gas tax (rebates for low-income taxpayers, revenue to incentivize fuel-efficient vehicles, 4% annual improvement in CAFE standards); 2. nuclear power plants (federal streamlining of licensing and site approval)click to enlargeQUOTES“The basic elements of a responsible energy policy are not complicated, but the politics are horrendous. Still, we can't continue to throw empty rhetoric at the issue, using the oil companies as political punching bags and relying on our troops to keep the oil flowing.I once told President Ford that some of our energy proposals were angering both Democrats and Republicans. His reply: "We must have it just right!" If only the presidential candidates could show the same sort of courage.”

WHEN- Sure North took the lease last year.- Rumors about the use of nuclear energy electricity for oil development were unconfirmed on May 22.- Last week, an Energy Alberta open house won acceptance for the nuclear plan from all but 3 of 300 attendees.- Development of the Sure North lease is not expected until after 2010.

WHERE- The leasehold is 100 kilometers northwest of Fort McMurray in Alberta.- The highly approving open house was in Whitecourt in central Alberta, where the nuclear reactor may be located. It may also be located in Peace River, an Alberta town closer to the oil fields.

WHY- Rumors about the use of nuclear energy electricity came out of talks confirmed by Energy Alberta with the other companies.- Husky Energy confirms interest in partnering with Royal Dutch on the development of nuclear energy electricity to work the tar sands oil.- Natural gas is the primary energy used in working the hard to get oil out of the tar sands. Steam and electricity from natural gas plants drive the process at Syncrude Canada and Suncor Energy. But natural gas supplies may be dwindling.- Energy Alberta claims nuclear would be cheaper and would cut back greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.- Development of the tar sands will require a lot of electricity.where oil sands are, where nuclear will be (click to enlarge)QUOTES- Henuset: “But we don’t have any contract with any oilsands company…We’re proposing to bring Candu Canadian technology, to become the lowest cost provider of energy for the oilsands producers in the region…”- Irving: “It’s not in the Regional Issues Working Group’s position to allow or disallow the use of specific energy source…Supply of natural gas is always an issue and individual companies look at their own ways of fixing the problem…”

WHY- Abdullah sees monetary savings in using solar energy to run street lighting, as Japan does. He is anxious to develop technological cooperation with Japan and was promised cooperation by Japan’s P.M.- The P.M. was impressed in Japan by solar energy’s accessibility and affordability. - The two P.M.s agreed on the threat of global warming, affirmed Japan’s goal to bring down temperatures by 2050 and promised mutual cooperation.- The P.M. will also take up the matter of a safety bar on lorries to prevent accidents involving bicycles and pedestrians.solar powered street lightQUOTESAbdullah: "This can be overcome by forging cooperation in research and development (R&D) with Japan, a country known for having numerous techniques to exploit solar energy…It's not as expensive as before. Some middle-class households are using solar power but not for the entire house…[Abe] said Japan is ready to work with other countries so that together they can focus on global warming. I told him that as an industrial powerhouse, Japan would surely have the means to carry out its plans…"

WHATGrowing interest in backyard turbines is creating conflicts over zoning and use permits.

WHENOngoing struggles.WHERECommunities across the US

WHY- Complaints against home turbines: unsightliness, possible flying blades, falling or crashing poles, noise.- Backyard windmills, can start at $12,000 and cut utility bills 10 to 50%. They are an $18 million-a-year US industry and could triple with permiting difficulties resolved.Variances, by definition, create further inequities.Don't let politics stop this (click to enlarge)QUOTES- Roy Butler, owner, Four Winds Renewable Energy: "Planning and zoning are the single biggest obstacle to wind energy in the United States…" - Gary Lisle, Dallas applicant for a backyard wind turbine: "The fact is, we're dealing with ignorance…"- Melissa, Texas, Mayor David Dorman: "If a developer came in tomorrow and said we have an idea for a green subdivision, I'd be all for it…"- Michael Bennett, general manager of the Bear Valley Springs homeowner association: "The No. 1 concern has been visual blight," Bennett said, "and No. 2, the noise level."- Rhode Island Renewable Energy owner Dave Anderson: "There's a lot of people who don't want to go through the hassle of fighting town hall…They say, 'We're not going to fight that fight.'"

WHOChina’s National Development and Reform CommissionChina's rising consumption (click to enlarge)WHATThe National Development and Reform Commission announced it will remove preferential policies for disproportionately large energy-consuming industries.

WHEN- Announcement made May 27.- Energy consumption fell 1.23 percent in 2006, less than 1/3 of 4% goal.

WHY- The announcement is seen as one among many steps China is taking to get skyrocketing energy consumption under control.- Primary targets: power, steel, oil refinery, chemicals, construction materials and metals industries, 70% of industrial energy.- Preferential programs scrutinized: tax holidays, cheap use of government land.

QUOTES“The Chinese government set a goal of reducing energy consumption per unit of gross domestic product by 20 percent by 2010, but failed miserably in 2006, the first year of implementation.”

WHOIndian Power Minisiter Sushilkumar Shinde, Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE); Ministry of Urban Development; Centre for Environmental Sciences and Engineering, IIT Kanpur,click to enlargeWHATThe Indian government has initiated an Energy Conservation Building Code which prescribes non-residential building energy efficiency design and construction standards.

WHOBP, spokesman David Nicholas; CCS: carbon capture and sequestration (click to enlarge)WHATBP announced its decision to not pursue the construction of a carbon-capture-and-sequestration (CCS) plant in Scotland when the UK government postponed competition for a subsidy award from March to November. BP described the government’s decision as “understandable.”

WHEN- Decision May 23. - BP has been exploring the project for 18 months

WHEREThe CCS project halted was in Scotland.

WHY- CCS technology, still unproven but much talked about as a solution to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, captures the CO2 emitted by generating electricity through the burning of fossil fuel and stores it. If proven to be widely practical, it might alleviate the harm done by coal and natural gas electricity generation in big economies like the US, China and India. - BP expended $50 million (25 million pounds) on preparations by 70 staff members over 18 months. The plan was to burn British and Norwegian North Sea natural gas and pump the CO2 back into North Sea oil wells to pump out more oil. Stop is what BP decided to doQUOTESNicholas: "That's an extension too far…Of course we're disappointed, it was a good opportunity but just one we couldn't bring to pass…We appreciate the breadth of issues the government has to face, it's difficult to put a time frame on it. We'll continue to work with the government and may even participate on someone else's project."

WHERE- The proposed Cabrillo Point LNG facility was too near the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary.

WHYIt is considered significant that Schwarzenegger’s explanation to federal authorities about rejecting the LNG terminal project on environmental grounds contained no objections to liquified natural gas as a fossil fuel and greenhouse gas (GHG)-producing contributor to global warming. It is particularly significant because the Governor has not in previous battles been reluctant to refer to climate change.- Schwarzenegger’s grounds for rejecting the Cabrillo Point site: 1. potential threat to nearby Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary waters; 2. air-polluting emissions from terminal regasification equipment and the LNG-carrying tankers.- NIMBY objections to terminals raised questions about them as targets of terrorist attacks or dnagerous accident sites but LNG has been seen as a preferable power plant fuel to coal, readily delivered from Asia as well as abundant and relatively cheap.- Environmentalists have declared that LNG production/processing/transport negates the lower emissions from burning natural gas.calculations like these frequently fail to consider transportation and processing emissions (click to enlarge)QUOTES- Schwarzenegger: "Liquefied natural gas can and must be an important addition to California's energy portfolio…The Cabrillo Port LNG project as proposed would result in significant and unmitigated impacts to California's air quality…Any LNG import facility must meet the strict environmental standards California demands."- Cox: "The dialogue has shifted in a huge way…This is no longer only about the safety factor. Nor can it be said to be 'just a NIMBY' issue. Rather, our critique of LNG -- that it's a setback to clean energy, that it's an unnecessary boondoggle, and that it will contribute to global warming -- has hit the mainstream." - Californians for Clean, Affordable Energy: "While we support energy conservation and efficiency and the development of renewable energy sources, California still needs additional supplies of clean-burning natural gas…By taking advantage of a large global supply of LNG, California can avoid gyrating prices and give businesses and consumers a more stable energy market…"

WHY- Clean Energy Fuels Corp. sells natural gas fuel to Los Angeles International Airport, Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport, SuperShuttle, Foothill Transit, Waste Management, Dallas-Ft. Worth International Airport, Sysco Foods, Denver International Airport and the US Navy.- IPO: 20 million shares, $13-$17 ea., to raise $300 million- May 25 Update: Share price dropped to $12 and shares offered cut to 10 million.- 1st Q, 2007: $861,000 loss, $28 million revenue; 1st Q, 2006: $3 million loss, $21 million revenue.- Pickens: oil and natural gas entrepreneur, 1980s corporate raider; invested $32 million cash, 2004 – 2006, + $50 million line of credit (increased to $100 million in 2006) to fund margin calls on futures; December, 2006, cancelled $69.7 million debt + assumed all outstanding futures contracts/associated liabilities-obligations ($78.7 million); Got 5-year warrant for 15 million shares CLNE @ $10/share. Now selling 4.9 million shares for $70 million @ $15/share. Will still own 29 million shares worth $435 million, the company's biggest shareholder. (Other shareholders: Westport Innovations Inc., Perseus 2000 LLC.) - Pickens’ hedge fund, BP Capital, earned $1.8 billion in 2006 betting on a decline in natural gas prices. His Exco Resources (oil and natural gas company) went public at $13/share in Feb., 2006, now at $18.40/share.a coming technoogy? (click to enlarge)QUOTES- IPO prospectus: “…[In the 1980s Pickens] became convinced that natural gas had a number of advantages over gasoline and diesel as a vehicle fuel…Over the next 15 years, Pickens and Clean Energy CEO Andrew Littlefair worked to develop the market through vehicle fleets that run on natural gas, which burns cleaner than gasoline or diesel. Natural gas is also widely produced in North America, unlike imported oil.” - Business Week: “…Clean Energy faces plenty of obstacles, which may have dragged on the offering. According to James DeStefano, an analyst at IPO research shop, Renaissance Capital LLC, natural gas lags far behind ethanol in gaining the American public’s attention. While corn-based ethanol has plenty of critics for being inconvenient and inefficient, it has a much larger U.S. footprint. Major car makers like General Motors produce cars that can run on a fuel mixture of 85% ethanol. More importantly, ethanol is a common additive in much of the U.S. fuel supply; drivers are frequently ethanol customers whether they know it or not...By contrast, DeStefano says there are fewer than 150,000 natural gas powered vehicles in the country. “This is more of a show-me type story,” he says. “You’ve got to get the automakers in.” And that will be difficult with so few places where natural gas powered vehicles can fill up. And he says the company does not yet have the reach to move to international markets where natural gas is more popular.

WHY- A new generation of biofuels seeks to increase efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) and other emissions- 1st generation fuels were agricultural crops like grains, corn, palm oil, and sugar cane; 2nd generation biofuels are/will include paper, pulp and wood.- Innovation: black liquor gasification. A fuel gas is produced from waste left by paper pulp purification. Higher efficiency but technical problems and startup costs remain.- Conference: 100 fuel production experts, politicians and car company reps, a dozen countries- EU goal: 10% of vehicle fuels to be biofuels by 2020.- Topics: the advantages and urgency of a new generation of automotive biofuels, especially w/developing countries increasing energy consumption.Black Liquor Gasification (click to enlarge)QUOTESLeohold: "We're facing a global problem, not a local problem…With the issues of climate change, Europe can't solve the problem alone." Henke: "If we stayed with that (first generation biofuels), we would be forced to reduce our energy consumption to a level that would be even below the one we have today…"

WHY- The 2 windfarms represent 241 megawatts of wind energy, moving Texas toward its target of 5,880 megawatts of renewable energy by 2015.- Sweetwater 4: 135 Mitsubishi 1.0-megawatt turbines, 46 Siemens 2.3-megawatt turbines; output sold to CPS Energy of San Antonio- Sweetwater 5: 35 Siemens turbines, 80-megawatts sold at market prices.- Babcock & Brown will manage/operate- GE Energy Financial has or takes part in 29 wind farms.click to enlargeQUOTES- Walsh: "This investment - along with a transaction we announced today in Roscoe, TX -- brings the total capacity our global wind equity holdings to more than 1,900 megawatts, and further diversifies our wind technology…in the spirit of GE's ecomagination initiative, these two wind farms will produce enough power for more than 90,000 homes and avoid 730,000 tons a year in greenhouse gas emissions, compared to equivalent fossil fuel generation." - Armisted: "It is exciting to see the growth of this project…The addition of phases 4 and 5 brings the total capacity of the Sweetwater project to 585 MW and makes it one of the largest wind farms in the world."

WHEREUKWHY- Storing a 300-mile range of H fuel at standard temperature and pressure would require a container the size of a bus while pressurizing or liquefying it would add too much weight. - Chemisorption: H gas atoms absorb into the crystal structure of L (after testing 1000s of soldi state substances). Lithium Hydride (Li4BN3H10) powder stores H at higher density but acceptable weight and volume. H is released as needed to the vehicle’s fuel cell. - H fuel is a utopian dream because it creates energy without greenhouse gas (GHG) emission byproducts. A 2004 report ('A Strategic Framework for Hydrogen Energy', published by Etech, Element Energy and Eoin Lees Energy) found Kyoto Protocol limits on CO2 could be met by H vehicles and no other changes.great science projectQUOTES-Edwards: "This could be a major step towards the breakthrough that the fuel cell industry and the transport sector have waited for…. "It's due to SUPERGEN's vision of combining many of the leading groups in the UK to tackle this, arguably the biggest challenge for the development of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. This work could make a key contribution to helping fuel cell cars become viable for mass-manufacture within around 10 years."

WHOThe Swiss Federal Environment Office, the Federal Energy Office and the Federal Agriculture Office.click to enlargeWHATA study (Rainer Zah, co-author) commissioned by the Swiss governmental agencies reports that though biofuels reduce emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs), they produce other potentially harmful forms of air pollution when burned as fuel.

WHENThe report was released May 22.

WHEREThe study was done by scientists in Switzerland.

WHY- The study of production cycles for bioethanol, biomethanol, biodiesel and biomethane found that biofuel production, though saving approximately 1/3 less GHGs than petroleum-derived fuels, generally caused so much more stress on the environment that they could not be termed “eco-friendly.”- The study also cites greater environmental damage to air and soil from increased fertilizer use resulting from higher demand for biofuel-producing crops, as well as slash-and-burn land-clearing for planting, which also generates GHGs..- The study did cite ways to make biofuel production less environmentally damaging, an option not available with fossil fuels.QUOTESZah: "The energetic efficiency and the resulting reduced emissions of greenhouse gases cannot be the sole criteria for assessing the environmental friendliness of biofuels…The prefix 'bio' doesn't necessarily mean environment friendly."

WHEN- The deal is done and the solar energy systems are ready for market, especially the energy-hungry Dubai market.- Tibo was established in 1969.

WHERE- The deal is on solar energy systems to be sold in Dubai and throughout the UAE.- Electron Solar Energy is based in Miami, FL- Tibo Company LLC is Dubai-based.

WHY- Tibo currently handles Electron batteries.- Dubai’s energy consumption went up 30% in 2006, in association with enormous growth and construction. The city is becoming a Middle East hub.QUOTES- Quinn: "Cash-rich oil nations are investing heavily into the Region; developing and building out the infrastructure in addition to creating the world's most luxurious tourist attractions. Dubai is currently the fastest growing city on Earth. This construction boom is progressing at an unprecedented level of luxury and technological advancement. With that type of forward thinking in place, Dubai will be a hotspot for green building technology and alternative energy products for years to come."- George: "The UAE represents a very attractive market for solar energy systems. Since the UAE lies on the earth's Sunbelt, its angle of Insolation is one of the highest in the world. Electron presented the ideal opportunity for Tibo to enter the solar energy market. I am considering setting up a grid-tie solar panel system in my new villa in Dubai to showcase Electron's Solar Energy systems to potential customers. Clients will see that installation as a testament to how much I believe in Electron's systems, products, and Future sales potential for our two companies together."

Friday, May 25, 2007

This is what you have been reading about at NewEnergyNews for some time now: Is it tax or trade? Scroll down or check headlines to the right for more information. One way or another, we’ve GOT to start paying for emissions. And when we do, the energy game changes completely.

WHATThe burning of fossil fuels produces greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions which are producing global climate change. These forms of energy are cheap because the harm produced by the GHGs is not part of the cost. A price for carbon dioxide emissions must be imposed. Only one question remains: Carbon tax or Cap-and-trade?

WHENThe EU trading scheme was implemented in 2005. The second phase begins next year. A third phase, with more corrections, will start in 2012.The U.S. decision probably won’t come until after the 2008 presidential election.

WHEREPoland is taking an active role in developing the EU’s phase two and may act as bank.

WHY- Economists tend to support a tax, though that leaves a debate about how much and how the tax revenues would be distributed. Politicians, always reluctant to impose new taxes, tend to prefer a free market driven cap-and-trade system. Business and industry are unified on only one thing: They need certainty to move forward.- The EU has had a cap-and-trade system and has had problems with price fluctuations, manipulation, fraud and enforcement. The second phase will make corrections. A carbon credit “central bank” remains uncertain, though Poland make take that role. - Many have faith in a freemarket system based on past successes. Previous US cap-and-trade programs involving sulfur and acid-rain regulations have been very successful faster and cheaper than predicted. click to enlargeQUOTES- Kvaal: "A tax is a tool that might help meet a goal, but a cap and trade system sets the goal…" - Mosher: “A lot was learned during the first two years of the EU cap-and-trade] system… The price was originally set too high… There's really no incentive to go into the banking part of it…But there was an increase initially in the cost of energy for consumers…”- Easterbrook: “One of the major problems with allocations is that it leads to lobbying and can never be done fairly…just set the price and see what the market comes up with…A carbon cap-and-trade system, set somewhere around $25 per ton, could be highly profitable and still cheap enough that if it did fail the backlash would not do too much damage…” - McDonough: "More ink is being spilled in U.S. papers about how the EU failed and the United States will, too…"

Plug-in Hybrids: The Cars that will ReCharge America by Sherry Boschert: "Smart companies plan ahead and try to be the first to adopt new technology that will give them a competitive advantage. That’s what Toyota and Honda did with hybrids, and now they’re sitting pretty. Whichever company is first to bring a good plug-in hybrid to market will not only change their fortune but change the world."

Oil On The Brain; Adventures from the Pump to the Pipeline by Lisa Margonelli: "Spills are one of the costs of oil consumption that don’t appear at the pump. [Oil consultant Dagmar Schmidt Erkin]’s data shows that 120 million gallons of oil were spilled in inland waters between 1985 and 2003. From that she calculates that between 1980 and 2003, pipelines spilled 27 gallons of oil for every billion “ton miles” of oil they transported, while barges and tankers spilled around 15 gallons and trucks spilled 37 gallons. (A ton of oil is 294 gallons. If you ship a ton of oil for one mile you have one ton mile.) Right now the United States ships about 900 billion ton miles of oil and oil products per year."

NOTEWORTHY IN THE MEDIA:
NewEnergyNews would welcome any media-saavy volunteer who would like to re-develop this section of the page. Announcements and reviews of film, television, radio and music related to energy and environmental issues are welcome.

Review of OIL IN THEIR BLOOD, The American Decades by Mark S. Friedman

OIL IN THEIR BLOOD, The American Decades, the second volume of Herman K. Trabish’s retelling of oil’s history in fiction, picks up where the first book in the series, OIL IN THEIR BLOOD, The Story of Our Addiction, left off. The new book is an engrossing, informative and entertaining tale of the Roaring 20s, World War II and the Cold War. You don’t have to know anything about the first historical fiction’s adventures set between the Civil War, when oil became a major commodity, and World War I, when it became a vital commodity, to enjoy this new chronicle of the U.S. emergence as a world superpower and a world oil power.

As the new book opens, Lefash, a minor character in the first book, witnesses the role Big Oil played in designing the post-Great War world at the Paris Peace Conference of 1919. Unjustly implicated in a murder perpetrated by Big Oil agents, LeFash takes the name Livingstone and flees to the U.S. to clear himself. Livingstone’s quest leads him through Babe Ruth’s New York City and Al Capone’s Chicago into oil boom Oklahoma. Stymied by oil and circumstance, Livingstone marries, has a son and eventually, surprisingly, resolves his grievances with the murderer and with oil.

In the new novel’s second episode the oil-and-auto-industry dynasty from the first book re-emerges in the charismatic person of Victoria Wade Bridger, “the woman everybody loved.” Victoria meets Saudi dynasty founder Ibn Saud, spies for the State Department in the Vichy embassy in Washington, D.C., and – for profound and moving personal reasons – accepts a mission into the heart of Nazi-occupied Eastern Europe. Underlying all Victoria’s travels is the struggle between the allies and axis for control of the crucial oil resources that drove World War II.

As the Cold War begins, the novel’s third episode recounts the historic 1951 moment when Britain’s MI-6 handed off its operations in Iran to the CIA, marking the end to Britain’s dark manipulations and the beginning of the same work by the CIA. But in Trabish’s telling, the covert overthrow of Mossadeq in favor of the ill-fated Shah becomes a compelling romance and a melodramatic homage to the iconic “Casablanca” of Bogart and Bergman.

Monty Livingstone, veteran of an oil field youth, European WWII combat and a star-crossed post-war Berlin affair with a Russian female soldier, comes to 1951 Iran working for a U.S. oil company. He re-encounters his lost Russian love, now a Soviet agent helping prop up Mossadeq and extend Mother Russia’s Iranian oil ambitions. The reunited lovers are caught in a web of political, religious and Cold War forces until oil and power merge to restore the Shah to his future fate. The romance ends satisfyingly, America and the Soviet Union are the only forces left on the world stage and ambiguity is resolved with the answer so many of Trabish’s characters ultimately turn to: Oil.

Commenting on a recent National Petroleum Council report calling for government subsidies of the fossil fuels industries, a distinguished scholar said, “It appears that the whole report buys these dubious arguments that the consumer of energy is somehow stupid about energy…” Trabish’s great and important accomplishment is that you cannot read his emotionally engaging and informative tall tales and remain that stupid energy consumer. With our world rushing headlong toward Peak Oil and epic climate change, the OIL IN THEIR BLOOD series is a timely service as well as a consummate literary performance.

Review of OIL IN THEIR BLOOD, The Story of Our Addiction by Mark S. Friedman

"...ours is a culture of energy illiterates." (Paul Roberts, THE END OF OIL)

OIL IN THEIR BLOOD, a superb new historical fiction by Herman K. Trabish, addresses our energy illiteracy by putting the development of our addiction into a story about real people, giving readers a chance to think about how our addiction happened. Trabish's style is fine, straightforward storytelling and he tells his stories through his characters.

The book is the answer an oil family's matriarch gives to an interviewer who asks her to pass judgment on the industry. Like history itself, it is easier to tell stories about the oil industry than to judge it. She and Trabish let readers come to their own conclusions.

She begins by telling the story of her parents in post-Civil War western Pennsylvania, when oil became big business. This part of the story is like a John Ford western and its characters are classic American melodramatic heroes, heroines and villains.

In Part II, the matriarch tells the tragic story of the second generation and reveals how she came to be part of the tales. We see oil become an international commodity, traded on Wall Street and sought from London to Baku to Mesopotamia to Borneo. A baseball subplot compares the growth of the oil business to the growth of baseball, a fascinating reflection of our current president's personal career.

There is an unforgettable image near the center of the story: International oil entrepreneurs talk on a Baku street. This is Trabish at his best, portraying good men doing bad and bad men doing good, all laying plans for wealth and power in the muddy, oily alley of a tiny ancient town in the middle of everywhere. Because Part I was about triumphant American heroes, the tragedy here is entirely unexpected, despite Trabish's repeated allusions to other stories (Casey At The Bat, Hamlet) that do not end well.

In the final section, World War I looms. Baseball takes a back seat to early auto racing and oil-fueled modernity explodes. Love struggles with lust. A cavalry troop collides with an army truck. Here, Trabish has more than tragedy in mind. His lonely, confused young protagonist moves through the horrible destruction of the Romanian oilfields only to suffer worse and worse horrors, until--unexpectedly--he finds something, something a reviewer cannot reveal. Finally, the question of oil must be settled, so the oil industry comes back into the story in a way that is beyond good and bad, beyond melodrama and tragedy.

Along the way, Trabish gives readers a greater awareness of oil and how we became addicted to it. Awareness, Paul Roberts said in THE END OF OIL, "...may be the first tentative step toward building a more sustainable energy economy. Or it may simply mean that when our energy system does begin to fail, and we begin to lose everything that energy once supplied, we won't be so surprised."

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.